Calculating Medical Device Patent Damages

About the Course:

The top five reasons for listening to this unique webinar are:

• Edwards Lifesciences LLC, v. Medtronic Corevalve LLC – $394 Million Verdict
• Alfred E. Mann Found. for Sci. Res. v. Cochlear Corp. – $131 Million Verdict
• Tyco Healthcare Group LP, v. Ethicon Endo-Surg. Inc. – $140 Million Verdict
• Syntrix Biosystems, Inc. v. Illumina Inc. – $96 Million Verdict
• Smith & Nephew Inc. v. Arthrex Inc. – $85 Million Verdict

Matthew Blackburn shares his seventeen years of experience drafting and litigating medical device patents. He reviews the implications of breaking case law, imparts practical business advice relative to patent litigation and provides case studies for calculating patent damages awards for medical device companies.

Unless you know the answers to questions such as these, you really should listen to this unique webinar:

• What are three ways to attack adverse jury awards?
• Does the Book of Wisdom typically cause imposed royalty rates to rise or fall during the assessment of patent damages in medical device litigation?
• What are the risks of putting a medical device patent application through accelerated patent examination?
• Are the Georgia-Pacific factors held in increasingly high or diminishing regard when determining reasonable royalty rates?
• In view of asserting a medical device patent, what should patent drafters keep in mind with regard to claim scope and claim language?
• To what extent do extra-territorial activities enable the pursuit of lost profits and reasonable royalties?
• What impact might dedicated sales companies have on the ability of a medical device company to pursue lost profits damages?
• What are some of the issues related to negotiating leverage contemplated by the Nash Bargaining Solution?
• Why are method of treatment claims vulnerable to FDA approval of competitors’ devices?
• When do business interests argue in favor of refraining from pursuing infringers?
• What constitutes notice of suspected infringement?
• How can a U.S. patentee collect lost profits on foreign sales?
• When is apportionment preferred over Entire Market Value Rule treatment when determining reasonable royalties in connection with medical device patent damages?
• What are the merits of using the Analytical Method for determining reasonable royalty damages?
• What are the risks of a medical device company allowing its researchers to review other published patents covering medical devices?

Among the patent litigation cases discussed during this webinar are:

• Datascope Corp. v. SMEC, Inc.
• Scimed Life Sys., Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson
• LaserDynamics v. Quanta Computer
• WhitServe LLC v. Computer Packages, Inc.
• Energy Transportation Grp., Inc. v. Wm. Demant Hldgs. A/S
• Tomita Tech. USA, LLC v. Nintendo Co.
• Calico Brand, Inc. v. Ameritek Imports, Inc.
• Mars, Inc. v. Coin Acceptors, Inc.
• Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor
• Microsoft Corp. v. AT & T Corp.

Course Leader:Matthew Blackburn, Managing Partner, Locke Lord LLP

Matthew Blackburn is the Managing Partner of the Locke Lord LLP San Francisco office. He is a patent lawyer who advises the medical products industry regarding all aspects of intellectual property (litigation representation, client counseling, patent procurement). Mr. Blackburn has served as a lead attorney and trial counsel in patent infringement litigation, counseled clients concerning intellectual property portfolio development and rendered opinions on validity, infringement, and freedom to operate on a wide array of technologies, including vascular grafts, stent-grafts, endovascular delivery systems, catheters, pharmaceuticals, polymeric compositions, and more.

A United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)-registered patent attorney, Blackburn’s procurement experience involves ex parte prosecution, post issuance review proceedings, as well as numerous appeals to the Board of Patent Appeals & Interferences.

 

Course Length: Approx. 1.5 hours

$295 PER USER